Month: November 2006

LIFE BELOW POVERTY LEVEL IN ARMENIAN VILLAGES
ArmInfo News Agency, Armenia
Nov 21 2006
The unbearable living conditions of Armenian villagers have proved in
the focus of attention of the International Charitable Organization
Mission East, which is engaged in revealing the social, education and
health problems, in particular, in the families with disabled children.
Recently, in the course of a visit to Armavir region, where the
organization has been implementing a pilot program of protection
of rights of the disabled, ArmInfo’s correspondent faced the life
below the poverty level on the example of two families. In the first
family, new-born infants died from unbearable living conditions and
irresponsible attitude of parents, despite the assistance of the local
authorities and the above charitable organization. The second family
lost 5 of 6 children for lack of money for treatment.
Majority of childbirth cases at home are not registered in any official
document, while the Health Ministry every year announces a reduction of
the childbirth cases at home, as well as of the date-rate of children
and mothers. However, in the above families, majority of the children
had no birth certificates. According to Vice Governor of Armavir region
L. Muradyan, the date-rate of infants in the region is 11.2 pro mil,
i.e. 11 of 1,000 infants die. She said no cases of maternal death
have been registered in the region in 2006.
The number of the socially unsecured in the region totaled 5,737
people. Those registered in the lists of “Paros” allowance system
number 3,224 people. According to the National Statistical Service
of Armenia, infants death-rate throughout Armenia in 2006 as against
2005 has grown by 2.8 pro mil, mothers’ date-rate is by 3 cases more.
Kim Arzner, Mission East Director, says the pilot program for
protection of rights of the disabled from socially unsecured families
worth a total of $1.6 million, may be continued also in Gegharkunik
and Tavush regions in case if its implementation in Armavir is a
success. Mission East has been operating in Armenia for already 15
years implementing various social programs. According to the monitoring
of the organization, at least 5 families in each community in Armenia
live in unbearable conditions.

TURKISH MPS VISIT USA TO TRY TO PREVENT ARMENIAN RESOLUTION
Anatolia News Agency, Turkey
Nov 21 2006
“Turkish MPs reiterate sensitivity on so-called Armenian genocide”
Washington D.C., 21 Nov: A group of Turkish parliamentarians visited
Washington D.C. in a bid to persuade congressional leaders to halt
so-called Armenian genocide resolutions after Democrats seized control
of both the US Senate and the House of Representatives.
Nancy Pelosi, who is in line to become the speaker of the House, has
promised to support a so-called genocide resolution during her election
campaign, underlining fears in Turkey that the new Congress might
adopt such a bill which has been prevented by the Bush administration
since it came to power in 2000.
The group, headed by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s
foreign policy adviser Egemen Bagis, held meetings with US legislators
as well as State Department’s counter-terrorism coordinator Henry
Crumpton and FBI’s New York director Mark Mershon.
Bagis played down adoption of a so-called genocide resolution at a
press meeting.
“The Armenian issue won’t be the first priority of the Democrat
Party. There are other issues,” he told journalists after an annual
session of the US Congress Turkey Working Group in West Virginia.
In September 2005, the House International Relations Committee
passed a bill recognizing so-called Armenian genocide. But Republican
Congressman Dennis Hastert, the outgoing House Speaker, did not take
the bill to a full House vote.
Bagis also said a joint effort was underway with Mark Parris, former US
ambassador to Ankara, and former Republican congressman Bob Livingston,
Turkey’s main lobbyist in the USA, against an Armenian resolution.

ECONOMIST INTELLIGENCE UNIT RANKS ARMENIA 110th BY ITS DEGREE OF DEMOCRACY
By Gevorg Stamboltsian
Radio Liberty, Czech Rep.
Nov 22 2006
A new Democracy Index of the World in 2007 published by the British
Economist’s Intelligence Unit ranks Armenia 110th among 167 nations
around the globe according to its degree of democracy.
According to British analysts, Armenia is among the states with
so-called hybrid regimes along with Georgia, Russia and Turkey.
Characteristically, this regime type involves elements of both
democracy and authoritarianism.
The Economist reviews a number of indexes, grading nations on a
10-point scale.
In particular, Armenia is graded low in terms of its electoral process
and pluralism — only 4.33 — the same index as for Uzbekistan, Kenya
or Singapore. Armenia also has a low score in terms of functioning
of government — 3.13 out of possible 10. It has nearly the same
score in terms of political culture. The only index where Armenia is
graded relatively high is the level of civil liberties. It turns out
that by this index Armenia’s situation is much better than that in
neighboring Turkey or, for example, in Russia.
The Economist Intelligence Unit decided to come up with a 2007
watch list. In the negative watch where Armenia is included along
with seven other nations, the Economist’s estimation on Armenia is:
“parliamentary elections in May 2007 could be highly flawed, tipping
the country into an outright authoritarian regime.”
Armenia’s neighbor Azerbaijan is on the Economist list of authoritarian
regimes, ranking 129th.
According to British experts, more than half of the world’s population
lives in a democracy of some sort, although only 13 percent reside
in full democracies. According to the Economist, 55 states have
authoritarian regimes today.

ARMENIAN SIDE AGREES TO MEETING OF PRESIDENTS OF ARMENIA, AZERBAIJAN
Today, Azerbaijan
Nov 22 2006
The Armenian side has agreed to a meeting between the presidents of
Armenia and Azerbaijan, which is likely to take place in Minsk on
November 28.
This was announced by OSCE Minsk Group cochairman from Russia Yuri
Merzlyakov in a press briefing at Zvartnots airport on Wednesday,
shortly before the cochairmen’s departure.
Merzlyakov described as “rich in content and effective” the meetings
with Armenian President Robert Kocharian and Foreign Minister Vartan
Oskanian.
“We still need to get the Azerbaijani side’s consent regarding the
meeting, in Baku later today, although earlier Azerbaijan’s Foreign
Minister Mammadyarov made a corresponding statement in this regard,”
the Russian cochairman said.
Commenting on the fact that only two of the three cochairmen of the
Minsk Group arrived in Yerevan, Merzlyakov said that they had agreed
on the division of work and U.S. cochairman Matthew Bryza “one of
these days is due to meet Arkady Ghukasian, who is now on a visit to
the United States.”
“On the whole, we think that the year is ending on a pretty optimistic
note,” the Russian cochairman said, adding: “If we manage to keep
this mood of the sides, and we hope that we will manage to do that,
then we will enter 2007 with quite good prospects.”
According to French cochairman Bernard Fassier, “settling such a
conflict is like building a wall of peace.”
“Every time we try to help the sides to put one or two bricks into that
wall, and we keep adding bricks, it is good,” the French cochairman
stated, emphasizing: “But the wall now is not strong enough yet to
make it possible to write an ultimate settlement agreement.”
“As Armenian foreign minister said, from October we presented not new,
but additional elements, and we hope that those additional elements
will give an opportunity to implement that approach,” Fassier said.
To the question about Azerbaijan’s war rhetoric, Merzlyakov expressed
an opinion that in the recent period fewer such statements have
been made.
“We always assume that similar “passionate” rhetoric impedes the
process, especially when those statements are made on the threshold
of some important meeting or at crucial moments,” Merzlyakov said.
“Anyway, we didn’t feel that it would essentially obstruct the basic
task to complete 2006 with the third meeting of the presidents.”
“In this sense in Washington, Paris and Moscow we have one position
that war cannot be a real possibility for settling this conflict,”
Fassier said. RFE/RL.
URL:

GEORGIA’S ARMENIAN AND AZERI MINORITIES
Source: Crisis Group
=4517&rss=1
Reuters, UK
Nov 22 2006
Tbilisi/Brussels, 22 November 2006: The Georgian government must take
significant steps to avoid conflict in the country’s ethnic Armenian
and Azeri areas.
Georgia’s Armenian and Azeri Minorities,* the latest report from
the International Crisis Group, examines the grievances of these two
communities. While there is no risk of the situation becoming Ossetian-
or Abkhaz-like threats to Georgia’s territorial integrity, tensions
are evident in the regions of Samtskhe-Javakheti and Kvemo-Kartli,
where the two predominantly live. There have been demonstrations,
alleged police brutality and killings during the past two years.
Georgia has made little progress towards integrating these minorities,
who constitute over 12 per cent of the population.
Armenians and Azeris are underrepresented in all spheres of public
life, especially government, and a lack of dialogue between them and
Tbilisi adds to perceptions of discrimination and alienation. This
is aggravated by economic problems, including high unemployment and
decaying infrastructure.
“Tbilisi needs to do much more to build confidence and to encourage
minorities to address their problems through state structures rather
than in the street”, says Sabine Freizer, Crisis Group’s Caucasus
Project Director.
While the government denies there is any inequality, many minorities
claim they are treated as second-class citizens. Feeling betrayed by
the Abkhaz and Ossetians, who declared independent states on Georgian
territory, Tbilisi has a deeply rooted, if unfounded, fear that others
may do the same. More sensitive and effective minority policies would
dampen such demands and might even help build trust with the Abkhaz
and Ossetians.
Some steps have been taken to improve the lives of minorities. With
donor support, Georgia has invested in road and infrastructure
rehabilitation in minority regions and created a ministry for civic
integration, established a public administration institute to train
minorities and ratified the Framework Convention for the Protection
of National Minorities.
None of this is likely to appease minorities’ political grievances
without policies that increase inclusion and participation.
Implementation of local government reform after the 2006 elections
provides a new platform for minorities to affect decision making
through municipal bodies. More consultation by Tbilisi when drafting
legislation can also help.
The government needs to establish a comprehensive education system
to teach Georgian as a second language to minorities, but while a
new generation is educated, minorities should not be discriminated
against, especially in hiring for state jobs. The state should also
implement its international commitments, particularly allowing use
of minority languages for government business in municipalities with
large numbers of minority citizens, as is standard throughout Europe.
“Only by acting on both tracks will Georgia succeed in reducing
tensions and increasing minority integration”, says Nicholas Whyte,
Crisis Group’s Europe Program Director.
Contacts: Andrew Stroehlein (Brussels) +32 (0) 2 541 1635 Kimberly
Abbott (Washington) +1 202 785 1601 To contact Crisis Group media
please click here *Read the full Crisis Group report on our website:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Georgia is a multinational state, building democratic institutions
and forging a civic identity. However, it has made little progress
towards integrating Armenian and Azeri minorities, who constitute over
12 per cent of the population. Tensions are evident in the regions
of Samtskhe-Javakheti and Kvemo-Kartli, where the two predominantly
live and which have seen demonstrations, alleged police brutality
and killings during the past two years. While there is no risk of
these situations becoming Ossetian or Abkhaz-like threats to the
state’s territorial integrity, Tbilisi needs to pay more attention
to minority rights, including use of second languages, if it is to
avoid further conflict.
Some steps have been taken to improve the lives of minorities. With
donor support, Georgia has invested in road and infrastructure
rehabilitation in minority regions; created a ministry for civic
integration; established a public administration institute to train
minorities; and ratified the Framework Convention for the Protection
of National Minorities. But overall the priority has been to assert
national unity over minority protection.
Azeris and Armenians are underrepresented in all spheres of public
life, especially government. The problem is especially acute for the
Azeris in Kvemo-Kartli, where Georgians hold all important positions.
Ethnic minorities’ political participation and representation – a key
to more effective integration – is disturbingly low. Lack of dialogue
between Tbilisi and minorities adds to perceptions of discrimination
and alienation.
The minorities’ biggest problem is inability to speak the state
language. Since the Rose Revolution, the government has been enforcing
laws obliging minorities to communicate in Georgian with local
officials, even to acquire official documents, submit complaints or
receive services. State jobs and professional licences are contingent
on knowing Georgian and passing new qualification exams. Language
instruction in schools is inadequate, and fewer minorities are
attending higher education institutions.
The administration of President Saakashvili is undertaking ambitious
local government reforms. A new law on self-governance was passed in
2005 and elections for new municipalities were held in October 2006.
Yet, power remains largely with regional and Tbilisi-based officials.
Minorities are unconvinced decentralisation will give them greater
decision-making influence. Armenians especially want to take their
own decisions on such issues as education and culture. Unless
decentralisation allows this, they will continue to demand autonomy
for Samtskhe-Javakheti. (Azeri activists in Kvemo-Kartli prioritise
greater representation in local government rather than autonomy.)
Minorities have been emigrating to Armenia and Azerbaijan. However,
Yerevan and Baku do not publicly advocate on behalf of their
respective minorities. Their priority is good relations with Tbilisi
and short-term stability. Armenians are mobilising politically more
than Azeris but both minorities have organised recent protests which
have on occasion turned violent. Tbilisi needs to do more to encourage
minorities to address their problems through state structures rather
than in the street.
RECOMMENDATIONS
To the Georgian Government:
To develop and implement more effective overall minorities policy
1. Complete work on the National Civic Integration Strategy and Action
Plan and allocate funds in the 2007 state budget to implement them.
2. Increase funding and capacities for the Ministry for Civic
Integration and appoint a senior, respected official as presidential
adviser on civic integration issues.
3. Ratify the European Charter for Regional and Minority Languages
and the European Outline Convention on Transfrontier Co-operation
between Territorial Communities or Authorities.
4. Take affirmative action to encourage minorities’ representation
in central and regional government.
5. Fund public defender’s offices in Marneuli and Akhalkalaki.
6. Consult with councils (sakrebulos) in municipalities with over 20
per cent minorities on issues sensitive for minorities and include
their representatives in the National Council on Civic Integration
and Tolerance.
7. Consult with the Council of National Minorities when drafting new
laws affecting minorities.
8. Continue investigation into land distribution in Kvemo-Kartli and
expropriate and redistribute land obtained illegally to local farmers.
9. Make evening news TV broadcasts available in local languages in
Kvemo-Kartli and Samtskhe-Javakheti.
To secure minorities’ rights in public administration and education
10. Introduce legislation allowing Azeris and Armenians, in
municipalities where they exceed 20 per cent of the population, to use
their native language to communicate with administrative authorities,
submit complaints, acquire civil documents and certificates, benefit
from public services and conduct municipal business and sakrebulo
meetings.
11. Amend all laws on civil service testing so that where minorities
are over 20 per cent of the population, officials may be eligible
to serve without knowing the state language at least for an interim
period of ten to fifteen years.
12. Amend the 2005 Law on General Education to emphasise bilingual
education in minority areas and ensure that core social science
subjects are taught in Azeri and Armenian (in parallel with Georgian).
13. Strengthen Georgian as a second language (GSL) teacher training,
development of GSL teaching materials and opportunities for minorities
to learn GSL in primary and secondary schools.
14. Improve access to higher education by amending rules to allow
minority students to take national entrance examinations in Russian,
Armenian or Azeri and provide intensive GSL study to students who do
not pass Georgian language exams.
15. Transform the Zurab Zhvania School of Public Administration into
a two-year civic administration academy targeting minorities and
offering intensive GSL training; set quotas so that at least 50 per
cent of new entrants in the Akhalkalaki branch of the Tbilisi State
University and the Marneuli branch of the Ilya Chavchavadze State
University are minorities; and accept Armenian government support to
improve the Akhalkalaki branch of the Tbilisi State University.
16. Create joint commissions with Azerbaijan and Armenia to develop
history textbooks for Georgian schools.
To improve minorities’ access to the judicial system and participation
in local government
17. Strengthen public services at the municipal level.
18. Allow judicial proceedings in Azeri or Armenian in municipalities
with over 20 per cent minorities.
19. Translate into Armenian and Azeri and disseminate all new
legislation.
20. Revise electoral boundaries to ensure equal representation in
municipal councils and equality of suffrage.
21. Remove legal and administrative barriers to registration of
political parties on a regional or ethnic basis and decrease the
threshold for a party’s representation in the parliament to 5 per
cent nationally.
22. Distribute information, manuals for precinct election commissions
(PECs), voter lists, ballots and protocols certifying results in
bilingual form in municipalities with over 20 per cent minorities.
Tbilisi/Brussels, 22 November 2006
Full report at amp;rss=1

LEADER OF TURKISH “NATIONAL MOVEMENT” PARTY ACCUSED TURKISH AUTHORITIES OF SEARCH OF DIALOGUE WITH ARMENIA
ArmInfo News Agency, Armenia
Nov 21 2006
The leader of the Turkish “National Movement” party (NMP), Devlet
Bakhchaly, has accused the Turkish authorities of the search of
dialogue with Armenia. As the Azeri APA Agency informs, he told about
it at the 8th congress of NMP, held on November 19.
According to the source, D. Bakhchaly had come out with severe
accusations of the ruling party of Justice and Development (AKP). The
Chairman of NMP had criticized the policy of the Prime Minister
of Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, aimed at the terrorism-fight and
touched upon the foreign political issues. “Occupation of the part
of Azerbaijan’s territory by Armenia and a drama of 1 million of
forced migrants has nothing common with the policy of AKP. Instead
of it, the Government is looking for the ways of dialogue with the
Armenians. Armenia, being an occupant and falsifier of history, tries
to dictate its conditions to Turkey and achieve the opening of borders
under the West ‘s support, as well as to make Turkey to remove the
embargo and recognize the Armenian Genocide”, Bakhchaly said.

ARMENIAN AND NK DM PRESS SERVICES REFUTE AZERI REPORT ABOUT EXERCISES IN AGDAM DISTRICT
ArmInfo News Agency, Armenia
Nov 21 2006
The press services of the defense ministries of Armenia and
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic have refuted the report by Trend news agency
(Baku) about exercises in Agdam district.
To remind, a Trend regional correspondent alleged today that he
had heard an explosion in Agdam district and it was due to military
exercises by Armenian armed forces.
“The correspondent just imagined the blast,” says the press secretary
of the NKR DM Senor Asratyan.

ARMENIA’S FOREIGN POLICY GUIDELINES
Eurasian Home Analytical Resource, Russia
Nov 22 2006
Vagan Shrikhanian, Former Vice-Prime Minister of Armenia, Yerevan
The pivotal task for Armenia today is survival of its nation.
The uncontrollable criminalization of power is a major obstacle to
solving this task. The problem is rather caused by external factors.
Some countries and international agencies were involved in corrupt
practices with the Armenian authorities. When the national interests
are replaced by personal or group interests, the manipulation of
Armenia and the achievement of the goals defined become easier.
As regards the abovementioned task, it vanished long ago from the
Armenian internal agenda as well as from the list of issues examined
at the Russian-Armenian summits.
The October visit of Armenian President Robert Kocharian to Russia
lends support to this fact.
The Armenian party was searching to strengthen its power, while
the Russian party wanted to expand its influence over Armenia. The
Armenian society perceives those goals as incompatible. The support
lent to Robert Kocharian by Moscow decreases the number of advocates
of the pro-Russian orientation of Armenia and creates more favorable
conditions for the pro-Western forces that already dominate Armenia’s
mass media.
After the visit of Robert Kocharian to Russia comments have appeared in
Armenia that Russia appropriated the telephony, that the gas pipeline
from Iran to Armenia and Armenia’s railroad will also become Russia’s
property, and that after all, Armenia will become Russia’s ‘province’.
This undermines Russia’s reputation in the eyes of Armenians and shows
that when supporting the Armenian authorities Russia tries to get
(in exchange for its support) the country’s strategically important
infrastructure as the only reliable tool for keeping Armenia under
its influence.
As for the prospects of Armenia’s mediation in the settlement of
the Georgian-Russian conflict, against a background of the existing
Russian-Armenian relations it is necessary to specify what political
forces in Armenia, Georgia and Russia will participate in the conflict
resolution.
If we are talking about the forces in power, there will be no problems
here. At a certain “price” it will be possible to arrange any deal
on any matter; but these arrangements will only be valid until more
lucrative proposals come from the USA, European Union, Turkey etc.
Evidently, there are such proposals now. Armenia’s mediation in the
Georgian-Russian conflict is relevant and even necessary. But the
current Armenian government is likely to shirk this mission like it
once shirked the peacekeeping operation in Lebanon.
So, no wonder that in the case of Iraq, Kocharian took up the call
of the USA at once, and Armenia has been participating in Iraq’s
destructive “democratization” up to now.
If we are talking about national consensus on Armenia’s mediation in
the Georgian-Russian conflict, it hasn’t yet been reached.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

SPIRIT OF COOPERATION, UP TO A POINT
by Mevlut Katik
Transitions Online, Czech Republic
Nov 22 2006
Turkic leaders talk closer diplomatic ties, but Tashkent stays away
over Turkey’s support for a UN resolution critical of its harsh rule.
>>From EurasiaNet.
The results of the 17 November summit of the leaders of Turkic-speaking
nations exceeded the expectations of many diplomats and political
analysts. The presidents of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,
and Turkey took the first steps toward the creation of a Turkic
commonwealth, giving an enthusiastic endorsement to efforts aimed at
strengthening energy and security ties.
The four leaders, along with Turkmenistan’s envoy to Turkey, gathered
at the Turkish Mediterranean resort city of Antalya for the summit,
the eighth such gathering of its kind, but the first held in five
years. Officials from Uzbekistan, who had been slated to attend, ended
up boycotting the event due to a breakdown in relations with Turkey.
The participants signed a declaration committing the Turkic states
to strengthen economic and transport ties, while stressing “the
importance of the joint fight against terrorism, the proliferation
of weapons of mass destruction, drug smuggling, weapons smuggling,
human smuggling and other organized crimes.” The statement also
endorsed the concepts of Turkey’s accession to the European Union,
and a peace settlement to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict that leaves
the territory under Azerbaijan’s control.
“We declare that we support a peaceful solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict in accordance with the principle of territorial integrity
of Azerbaijan, and that we will further support fraternal Azerbaijan
in this dispute,” Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer said.
The four leaders underlined both the “increasing importance of
the Caspian Basin for the energy security of Europe” and the
“strategic importance of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline
opening and the [expected] completion of the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum
natural gas pipeline.” They also stressed the importance of the
possible addition of trans-Caspian transportation routes to both
pipelines. Sezer stressed in his opening speech the importance of
involving energy-rich Turkmenistan in the summit process, and vowed
that Ankara would work to facilitate energy exports from the Caspian
Basin to Europe via Turkey. Turkic leaders underlined in the Antalya
declaration that “increasing energy cooperation would positively and
directly contribute to economic and political stability” in Eurasia.
Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbaev took observers, and even many
participants, by surprise by proposing the creation of a Turkic
parliamentary assembly. Nazarbaev went on to nominate former Turkish
president and prime minister Suleyman Demirel to serve as the proposed
assembly’s first chairman.
Nazarbaev’s proposal was indicative of his interest in exploring the
feasibility of a full-blown Turkic commonwealth. “We have to discuss
it,” Kazakh Foreign Minister Kasymzhomart Tokaev told EurasiaNet,
referring to the commonwealth possibility.
It would appear that Nazarbaev, Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliev,
and Kyrgyz leader Kurmanbek Bakiev now see closer cooperation as
a way to leverage the collective influence of “200 million Turks,”
as Nazarbaev put it, in pursuit of specific policy aims.
“The problem of one Turkic-speaking nation must be the problem of
other Turkic-speaking nations,” the Anatolia news agency quoted Aliev
as saying. Observers interpreted his comments as meaning Turkic states
should collectively push for results in Turkey’s EU accession process
and Azerbaijan’s Karabakh peace talks that are satisfactory to Ankara
and Baku respectively.
If the Turkic states actually opted to coordinate diplomatic action,
they might have the collective muscle to alter the existing equilibrium
in many geopolitical matters. In the case of Turkey’s troubled drive
to join the EU, for example, a Turkic commonwealth could influence
Brussels’ decision-making calculus by playing the energy card, letting
it be known that a rebuff of Ankara could hinder the EU’s access to
Central Asian energy supplies.
Kyrgyz diplomats also stressed that closer cooperation would enhance
Bishkek’s international profile. Kanat Tursunkulov, a top Kyrgyz
Foreign Ministry official, said President Bakiev’s attendance at the
summit, despite the “recent troubles” in Bishkek, underscored the
Kyrgyz government’s position that closer cooperation among Turkic
states is a top political priority.
Commenting on the outcome of the summit, a top Turkish diplomat
said, “The era of romantic embracing has ended; the era of concrete
cooperation has started.” Nazarbaev, Aliev, and Bakiev all quietly
expressed a desire for their respective countries to host the next
Turkic summit. At the same time, participants emphasized a need to
proceed cautiously, seeking to dispel any impression that they are
rushing toward institutionalizing the group.
Beyond the steps toward closer cooperation, the Turkic summit will be
remembered for the public airing of a diplomatic feud between Turkey
and Uzbekistan. Some news reports claimed that Uzbek officials stayed
away from the gathering to protest the final declaration’s wording
on the Karabakh settlement. However, a senior Turkish official said
the reason for Tashkent’s displeasure was Turkey’s decision to join
the United States in supporting a draft measure in the UN General
Assembly’s Human Rights Council that would condemn human rights
violations in Uzbekistan.
The official was outspoken in his criticism of both Uzbekistan’s
rights behavior and Tashkent’s reaction to Ankara’s vote. “It is
time that some countries learned that democracy and human rights
are essential to integrate into the global system,” he said. “Turkey
will persistently work to promote democracy and human rights for the
region’s own benefit.”
Turkey’s decision to vote for the draft Human Rights Council
resolution was “a reflection of our ideals and understanding of
the importance of democracy and respect for human rights,” the
official continued. “Turkey has been criticized for similar reasons
[human rights violations] in the past, but we never turned it into
a bilateral issue, and chose to make improvements in our [democracy
and human rights] records instead.”
Such blunt talk would appear to mark a significant shift in Turkish
policy, as Turkish officials had until now avoided open criticism of
Uzbek government action. It may be that Turkey’s desire to meet EU
accession criteria, especially the need to bolster its human rights
credentials, is playing a role in the adoption of a tougher line toward
Tashkent. The official also indicated that Ankara is growing tired
of Uzbek President Islam Karimov’s demands. “They [Uzbek officials]
also accuse us of supporting the Uzbek opposition, citing [the fact
that] opposition leader Mohammad Solih freely travels to and lives
in Turkey. Mr. Solih is free to travel anywhere he wants to go,
and travels to Norway, Britain, and the United States. Why is Turkey
being singled out?” the official said.
Mevlut Katik is a London-based journalist and analyst. He reported
this piece from Antalya. This is a partner post from EurasiaNet.

ALGERIAN GENOCIDE MONUMENT TO BE BUILT IN TURKEY
By Cihan News Agency
Zaman, Turkey
Nov 22 2006
The municipality of Bandirma, a northwestern Turkish city, has approved
a proposal to build a monument to victims of the Algerian Genocide
in the town in protest the adoption of the controversial Armenian
bill in the French parliament.
The proposal was submitted to the mayor during a municipal assembly
meeting and has been approved unanimously.
Bandirma Mayor Cemal Oztaylan said that they had asked for help from
the Algerian Embassy in Ankara on how to address the genocide in the
best way. Oztaylan remarked that the embassy would respond to their
request in a month.
The mayor of the town noted that some citizens applied to the
municipality to make donations for the construction of the monument,
adding that their application would be evaluated.
On Oct. 12, French National Assembly passed a bill which criminalized
denying the so-called Armenian genocide, which they claimed the
Ottoman Empire committed against Armenians during World War I.
Interestingly enough, France does not recognize the claims of genocide
which the French committed against the Algerians in the second half
of the 20th century.
“Sons don’t apologize for their fathers’ mistakes” French Interior
Minister Nicolas Sarkozy said during an official visit to Algeria last
week, in response to the Algerian government, which urged France to
apologize for the killings and suffering during 130 years of French
colonial rule.